Rod, That's interesting. At least the Portland District Office uses it to a fault (and I do mean fault).
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Rod DiBona <[email protected]> wrote: > Good information Ron. Thank you for the help. The interesting thing is that > we do quite a bit of Corp work, most of it design build and we have never > been asked to comply or use Specsintact. So if the Corp uses it they use it > intermittently or it has never been enforced on any of our specific jobs. > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 10:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: USACE Velocity > > Yes. Specsintact sucks from an organizational basis since it tends to > put the horse before the cart, that is, the details drive the > hierarchy rather than starting with applicable codes, then progressing > to applicable sections, and then to the details of the section. Get > the Corps to change to a better organized format where non-applicable > items can be deleted--NO. Unfortunately even though the bid > solicitation did not include a reference to Specsintact you are > expected to know the Corps uses this format and meet it. I've watched > the document compiler at an engineering firm age prematurely trying to > understand this formatting. > > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Rod DiBona <[email protected]> wrote: >> OK. To get back to the original post. I think Gary makes a good point here. >> The more experienced and competent contractors are more likely to pick up on >> nuances like this and include the cost in their quote. An unintended >> consequence here is that with this in a specification you are more likely to >> consistently get the "low bid" contractor. >> >> In my case this was advertised as a design build project. The standard list >> of documents that the design was to comply with for government jobs was >> listed including the UFC 3 -600. No reference to which addition, so we >> naturally assumed the most current which is by far the most stringent. The >> 2009 added galvanized sch 40 and cut groove only for all dry and preaction >> systems. We based our proposal on this and were awarded the project. We >> submit our specifications with our 60% drawings and the USACE says they want >> the specifications to be chosen from their "Specsintact" ...like their >> version of "masterspec." In these specifications the velocity is limited to >> 20 fps. The UFC does NOT limit velocity that I know of so this creates a >> problem. My question was if anyone was familiar with Specsintact for Corp >> jobs and if they were able to persuade them to not use the restriction. >> Great discussion thanks for the replies. >> >> >> Rod DiBona >> Rapid Fire >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Williams >> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 9:48 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: USACE Velocity >> >> Another reason for simple, clear and precise specs without all of the >> BS normally in there. There is no reason for a 54 page specification >> to relocate 20 heads, even from the Feds. >> >> >> At 11:26 AM 12/29/2010, you wrote: >>>This spec, that has no code basis, is a great reason why "lesser" >>>contractors end up with these jobs. When you put a job out to public bid and >>>you have 20 FP contractors bid on it, the winner will almost always be the >>>one that missed this type of spec. The type of bidder that >>>does diligence and finds these weird specs and bids accordingly is probably >>>the FP contractor that the owner would like to see get the job but will >>>likely end up with the one that 'misses' this type of spec. Thus the saying >>>"low bidder built this thing" >>> >>>If you want big pipe, say so! If you don't want a 1" grid, say so! But, I >>>gotta say, I don't know how suspending bigger pipe, makes a structure last >>>longer. >>> >>> >>>Gary Stites >>>661-213-9379 >>> >>>www.rlhfp.com >>>www.sprinklersoft.net >>>Pandora Station http://www.pandora.com/?sc=sh43464983213902734 >>> >>>On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > Do you have a link? I'm being (L)azy today as I'm on (b)reak and it >>> > (s)nowed. The RG equation is 1b + 1s = 3L >>> > >>> > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 8:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > > Todd, >>> > > Nothing is "snuck" in and there is definitely no entrapment. It is in >>> > plain >>> > > English in the spec. It is the contractor's responsibility to read all >>> > of >>> > > the specification and ask for any clarification that he thinks is >>> > > needed. >>> > A >>> > > clarification or amendment for one also for all bidders. >>> > > >>> > > Quite frankly, it does help to clarify the reasoning, on this forum, >>> > behind >>> > > some of the requirements. I like open discussions such as these. >>> > However, >>> > > always remember that the spec is a contract document regardless of what >>> > it >>> > > requires no matter how ridiculous it may seem. Everybody bids the same >>> > set >>> > > of contract documents. >>> > > >>> > > By the way, Hazen-Williams is not all some believe it is. It works >>> > fairly >>> > > well with water based sprinkler systems as long as it is applied >>> > correctly. >>> > > New sprinkler systems with reasonable flows, pressures, velocities, and >>> > > temperatures will do OK with H-W. >>> > > >>> > > One example is working with aged versus new pipe. There is no clear cut >>> > > methodology to compensate for the added roughage other than lowering the >>> > > C-factor. Once you try to get below C=100 you are in no man's land. I >>> > > suggest that everyone reads the original works of H&W and see for >>> > > themselves. It is free on Google Books as the copyright has expired. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Rahe Loftin >>> > > Sent from my Blackberry >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > ----- Original Message ----- >>> > > From: Todd Williams [[email protected]] >>> > > Sent: 12/29/2010 10:39 AM EST >>> > > To: [email protected] >>> > > Subject: RE: USACE Velocity >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > If you want a safety factor in the design include ONE plainly stated >>> > safety >>> > > factor and be done with it. They all typically accomplish the same >>> > > thing, >>> > so >>> > > keep it simple. Unless you are trying to trip up contractors in the >>> > bidding >>> > > process to keep the prices down, there is no reason to do sneak all of >>> > this >>> > > little stuff in a spec. >>> > > >>> > > At 09:57 AM 12/29/2010, you wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> One last thing to note about the velocity restrictions: their use helps >>> > to >>> > >> continue the myth throughout engineering circles that they are a >>> > necessity. >>> > >> I am certain most engineers who see a GSA spec with the velocity >>> > >> restrictions aren't thinking it is there merely to give a larger safety >>> > >> factor. Instead they are thinking things like :'high velocity is bad >>> > >> for >>> > >> pipes'; 'it is too noisy'; 'the H-W equation is invalid at high >>> > velocities', >>> > >> etc. So they continue to keep it within THEIR specs, which are seen by >>> > other >>> > >> engineers and AHJs - and the myths of velocity restrictions continue. >>> > >> >>> > >> And if there is a desire to keep the restrictions in place strictly for >>> > >> the more robust design, then please explain it in the specs, so the >>> > myths >>> > >> aren't promulgated. 'As an additional safety factor, all pipe >>> > >> velocities >>> > >> shall be limited...' At least then if the design goes awry the >>> > >> designer/engineer can come back and explain why the restriction should >>> > be >>> > >> lifted for their particular case. >>> > >> >>> > >> Mark A. Sornsin, PE | Fire Protection Engineer >>> > >> Ulteig Engineers, Inc. |Fargo, ND >>> > >> Direct: 701. 280.8591 | www.ulteig.com >>> > >> >>> > >> -----Original Message----- >>> > >> From: [email protected] >>> > >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron >>> > Greenman >>> > >> Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:40 PM >>> > >> To: [email protected] >>> > >> Subject: Re: USACE Velocity >>> > >> >>> > >> Given your argument maybe the oversized main/velocity restriction is >>> > >> just a simpler way to get desired results in most cases but your >>> > >> example points to the less than most cases and is valid. And maybe a >>> > >> simple way to beat the devil isn't any more warranted than designing >>> > >> to the extreme least costly. Comes back to the fact that some projects >>> > >> are less critical than others and lend themselves to the low bid at >>> > >> any cost philosophy, some have higher goals that can be dealt with by >>> > >> using rule of thumb requirements, and some are so high value that >>> > >> neither approach works, but since each project is unique until >>> > >> defined. Each has to be analyzed and assessed, the cost of that >>> > >> assessment being commensurate with the benefit of paying for it.Mark's >>> > >> example requires a lot of value engineering to avoid very high >>> > >> unnecessary costs, a strip mall or the latest Meth Lab Manor apartment >>> > >> complex needs to be low-balled, while most projects may be somewhere >>> > >> in between. >>> > >> >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> > >> [email protected] >>> > >> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >>> > >> >>> > >> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >>> > >> >>> > >> To Unsubscribe, send an email >>> > >>> to:[email protected]<to%[email protected]> >>> > >> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >>> > > >>> > > Todd G. Williams, PE >>> > > Fire Protection Design/Consulting >>> > > Stonington, CT >>> > > 860.535.2080 >>> > > www.fpdc.com >>> > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> > > [email protected] >>> > > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >>> > > >>> > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >>> > > >>> > > To Unsubscribe, send an email >>> > >>> to:[email protected]<to%[email protected]> >>> > > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> > > [email protected] >>> > > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >>> > > >>> > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >>> > > >>> > > To Unsubscribe, send an email >>> > >>> to:[email protected]<to%[email protected]> >>> > > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Ron Greenman >>> > Instructor >>> > Fire Protection Engineering Technology >>> > Bates Technical College >>> > 1101 So. Yakima Ave. >>> > Tacoma, WA 98405 >>> > >>> > [email protected] >>> > >>> > http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ >>> > >>> > 253.680.7346 >>> > 253.576.9700 (cell) >>> > >>> > Member: >>> > AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC >>> > >>> > They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis >>> > Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >>> > >>> > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >>> > >>> > To Unsubscribe, send an email >>> to:[email protected]<to%[email protected]> >>> > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>Gary Stites >>>661-213-9379 >>> >>>www.rlhfp.com >>>https://sites.google.com/site/nbcjudah/ >>>https://sites.google.com/site/moondogscc/ >>>www.sprinklersoft.net >>>Pandora Station http://www.pandora.com/?sc=sh43464983213902734 >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>[email protected] >>>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >>> >>>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >>> >>>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] >>>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >> >> Todd G. Williams, PE >> Fire Protection Design/Consulting >> Stonington, CT >> 860.535.2080 >> www.fpdc.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >> >> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >> >> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] >> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >> >> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] >> >> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] >> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) >> > > > > -- > Ron Greenman > Instructor > Fire Protection Engineering Technology > Bates Technical College > 1101 So. Yakima Ave. > Tacoma, WA 98405 > > [email protected] > > http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ > > 253.680.7346 > 253.576.9700 (cell) > > Member: > AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC > > They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis > Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
